On Tue, 19 Jan 2021 14:49:17 -0600 Timur Tabi <timur@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 1/19/21 2:10 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > I'm curious, what is the result if you replaced %p with %pS? > > > > That way you get a kallsyms offset version of the output, which could still > > be very useful depending on what you are dumping. > > %pS versatile_init+0x0/0x110 > > The address is question is often not related to any symbol, so it > wouldn't make sense to use %pS. When it's not related to any symbol, doesn't it still produce an offset with something close by, that could still give you information that's better than a hashed number. > > Maybe you meant %pK? I'm okay with that instead of %px. If others are OK with that, perhaps that should be the compromise then? -- Steve
